The 39th Annual Meeting of the IWC
in Bournemouth, UK1987

IWC/39/25

JAPAN’S SMALL-TYPE SUBSISTENCE WHALINGThe Government of Japan
1987

CONTENTS
I. Foreword ................................................................. 13
II. Proposal ................................................................... 13
III. Reasons for submitting the Proposal ....................... 13
Table: Outline of Subsistence Whaling in Whaling
Nations .................................................................... 14I.

FOREWORD

3.

In 1986, the Government of Japan submitted SmallType Whaling in Japan’s Coastal Seas (TC/38/AS2) to theTechnical Committee Sub-Committee on Aboriginal/Subsistence Whaling based on the belief that a part of smalltype whaling in Japan’s coastal seas should be recognizedas subsistence whaling because of its similarity toaboriginal/subsistence whaling, now authorized by the IWC,
in the United States, the USSR and Denmark.
The Government of Japan proposed an amendment tothe Schedule to the effect that continuation of subsistence
whaling in Japan be allowed. This paper presents reasonsand background of the proposal.

4.

II. PROPOSALThe Government of Japan proposes that the following
sub-paragraph be inserted in 13(b) of the Schedule.
“The taking by native whalers of minke whales
from the Okhotsk Sea-West Pacific stock ispermitted, but only when the meat and products
are to be used exclusively for local consumption.
The number of whales taken in accordance withthis paragraph shall not exceed the limit shown in
Table l.”(In this connection, the Government of Japan requests
that the taking of 210 whales be permitted as the catch limit
for the 1988 coastal season. )5.

III. REASONS FOR SUBMITTING THE
PROPOSAL
1. Aside from Antarctic and large-type coastal operations,
small-type whaling has been practiced in Japan. This
type of operation was started in order to meet thedemand for raw whale meat in the areas where amitori
method had taken place by use of harpoons and nets.
This came to be practiced after the latter type ofwhaling declined.
2. With the modernization of Japanese economy, catching
methods for this type of operation also improved after
the Norwegian whaling method was introduced. Alongwith expanding domestic market and improved

6.

13

preservation and distribution systems after the WorldWar II, catch by this type of whaling was increasingly
directed to the market in large cities. This does notmean that traditional local demand for raw meat wasovertaken by shipment to outside markets, but demand
for whale meat remained stable in local communities
as part of their traditions.
A total of nine small-type whaling vessels of 15 to 48
gross tons have been operating, mainly from such
whaling bases as Abashiri-Monbetsu and Kushiro, bothin Hokkaido, and Ayukawa in Miyagi Prefecture, tosupply raw minke whale meat to local people in theseareas. Annual catch amount stood at around 320
animals recently.
As a result of the enforcement of a commercial whaling
moratorium, distribution of whale meat in Japan will
go on to disappear. Along with it, whale meat fromcommercial operations, mainly distributed in large
cities, will disappear from the market. But theGovernment of Japan considers that the supply of
whale meat, although in a limited amount, should bemaintained in the above-mentioned three areas whichhave had traditional consumption of whale meat.
Whale meat is deeply rooted in household dietary habitsin these areas and cannot be substituted by other food.
The amount of whale meat consumed in these areas isnot necessarily very large as compared with other foods
because various types of food have been made available
as local distribution system improved. From anutritional point of view, supply of whale meat isminimal for it to be called an indispensable food item.
But whale meat still holds an important part in thecommunity life of these areas in that eating of whale
meat, although in small amounts, at family reunions
and religious events help them to enhance the sense ofunity in the community as well as their ties withancestors, which constitutes a moral backbone in thosecommunities. The supply of food which serves as a basisof social linkage should be maintained even in a limited
amount.
In looking back over the past discussions on the issue
on aboriginal whaling at the IWC, it should be notedthat the concept of aboriginal/subsistence whaling has
not always been fixed but undergone some changes.
(See separate paper: History of the consideration ofaboriginal/subsistence whaling.) Even so-called
aborigines themselves are changing. For bothGreenlanders and Alaskan Eskimos, demand for whaleIWC/39/25

meat has been increasing along with an increase in local
population and the number of crews engaged in whaling.
Furthermore, primitive catch methods associated with theword “aboriginal” were negated, and shifted into more
efficient modern whaling methods in order to minimise
loss of whale meat in hunting. In Greenland, small fishingvessels having a whaling gun loaded with non-explosive
harpoons are used for the most part, and large-caliber
rifles are used, when necessary, to take minke whales. In
the Soviet Bering Sea, whaling vessels catch a total of
140 gray whales on behalf of the so-called aborigines.
Taking account of all the factors mentioned above,small-type whaling in Japan to maintain traditional
whale meat consumption by local people bears a strong
resemblance to whaling authorized by the IWC fornatives in certain countries.
7. The present aboriginal/subsistence whaling is allowed
not because it is carried out by the so-called aborigines.
This can be well understood if we consider that not all
whaling activities to be carried out by the so-called
aborigines would not necessarily be authorized bythe IWC.
Aboriginal/subsistence whaling was recognized by theIWC on account of its subsistence need for local people.
Such an operation is currently termed as aboriginal/
subsistence whaling because it happens to be carriedout by the so-called aborigines.
Webster’s New International Dictionary of the English
Language (1919 edition) explains the term ‘aborigines’
as “...esp. as contrasted with an invading or colonizingrace.” We should not use such a discriminatory term asaborigine. Therefore, the IWC might preferably use theterm ‘native’ rather than ‘aborigine’ or ‘aboriginal’.
Part of Japan’s small-type whaling carried out by nativewhalers has a significance for local people in a similar
way as it does for natives in Alaska, Greenland and theUSSR. (See Table below). Therefore, it seems adiscriminatory and unfair approach to deprive theJapanese small-type whalers and people in the local
community of the right similar to that given to Alaskan
Eskimos and other natives simply because the operation
is not carried out by so-called aborigines.

Table: Outline of Subsistence Whaling by Whaling Nations
JapanU.S.A.

Denmarkminkebowheadminke, fingray

unclassifiedPS(1) PS(2) unclassified
unclassified

SMS

2 Number needed
per year210

26 strikes(maximum 32 strikes)

3 Needed weight
per year

600 tons(= 2l0 x 3 tons)

1,000 tons(=26 x 40 tons)

1,200 tons(=142 x 5 tons +10 x 50 tons)

2,500 tons(=179 x 14 tons)

4 Catch method

whaling boats withwhaling gunsoar boats or motor boats
with lances or guns

kayak with rifles or harpoons,
whaling boats with whalingguns

whaling boats withwhaling guns

5 Size of boats

15-50 tons

several tons

several tons, about 50 tons

several hundred tons

100

100 active crows

unknown

unknown

about 480,000

6,000

about 50,000

14,0008 distribution

distributedin the local community

distributed in the area

barter in principle

unknown

9 Sharingavailable to all residents

distributed by whaling
captains

available to all residents

unknown

10 Regional involvement

moral backbone, cultural
identity of local community

needed for regional
identity, cultural integrity

essential for
maintaining large villages

unknown

11 Cultural aspects

traditional ceremonies andfestivals

traditional ceremonies
and festivals

traditional costumes,
folk songs

unknown

1 Species
Stock classification

minke
fin

6 Number of people
engaged7 Number of consumers

14minkefin(1) 130 (2) 1210

USSR179

IWC/39/26

HISTORY OF THE CONSIDERATION OF
ABORIGINAL/SUBSISTENCE WHALINGThe Government of Japan
1987

CONTENTS

However, it only provides that whale meat and products
are to be used exclusively for local consumption by theaborigines.
At the 13th meeting in 1961, a Danish proposal
concerning aboriginal whaling by Greenlanders wasdiscussed and approved. Although catching of humpback
whales in the North Atlantic was forbidden, Greenlandwhaling boats below 50 tons were allowed to take 10
humpback whales a year in waters off Greenland and flenseand process them onboard whaling vessels as an exceptional
measure. This is the first case in which a catch limit wasapplied to aboriginal whaling.
At the 16th meeting in 1964, the U.S. delegation
proposed to the IWC an amendment of paragraph 2 of theSchedule, with an objective to avoid a possible misuse of
the aboriginal right concerning whaling for commercial
purposes and the Commission agreed on the amendment.
The new paragraph stated: “It is forbidden to take or killgray whales or right whales except by aborigines or aContracting Government on behalf of aborigines and only
when the meat and products of such whales are to be used
exclusively for local consumption by the aborigines.” Theoriginal intention of the U.S. proposal was to catch bowhead
whales on behalf of aborigines in an efficient way anddeliver the catch to aborigines so as to minimize struckand-lost rate which often happened in the Eskimo catch.
However, in actuality, Eskimos continued to take bowhead
whales, despite the Schedule amendment. As a result ofthis Schedule amendment, the USSR began taking graywhales by whaling vessels on behalf of its aborigines, andthis catch is still practiced.
From the foregoing, it can be pointed out that the 1931
Convention provided for the contents of aboriginal whaling
to be exempted from application of the provision, but thecurrent 1946 Convention does not present the contents ofaboriginal whaling in a clear way, gradually moving awayfrom the interpretation at the time of 1931. At present there
is no activity which can be properly called aboriginal
whaling under the terms of the 1931 Convention. Aboriginal
whaling has been subject to change in the course of time,and so has the Commission’s interpretation of it.
Attempts as in the following were made to define theseterms in the Report of the Special Working Group ofTechnical Committee concerning management principles
and development of guidelines about whaling for
subsistence by aborigines held in Brighton, U.K., in 1981
(IWC/33/14):

I. Background of ‘aboriginal/subsistence whaling’ ...... 15
II. Aboriginal whaling versus coastal whaling ............ 16I.

BACKGROUND OF ‘ABORIGINAL/SUBSISTENCE WHALING’The International Convention for Regulation ofWhaling, formulated in Geneva in September 1931,provided in Article 3 for the exemption of whaling byaborigines from the convention provisions as follows.
The present Convention does not apply to aborigines
dwelling on the coasts of the territories of the HighContracting Parties provided that:
1. They only use canoes, pirogues or other exclusively
native craft propelled by oars or sails.
2. They do not carry firearms.
3. They are not in the employment of persons otherthan aborigines.
4. They are not under contract to deliver the productsof their whaling to any third person.
Although a definition of aborigine was not given in thisconvention, the aboriginal whaling here obviously meantless efficient catches of whales through primitive methods
and an efficient catch method using engine-powered boats
and explosives was excluded.
Under the present International Convention for theRegulation of Whaling, signed in 1946, permission ofaboriginal whaling (not in the form of exemption from theprovision) is provided for not in the main texts of theConvention but in the Schedule attached thereto. The main
texts of the Convention give procedural provisions while
concrete items pertaining to regulations on whaling are dealtwith in the Schedule. The present Schedule does not include
the conditions stated in (1) to (3) in the 1931 Convention
but has, as its conditions, what corresponds to (4) in the1931 Convention, namely, whale meat and products should
be used exclusively for local consumption by the aborigines.
Paragraph 2 of the Schedule, agreed at the second meetingin 1950, stated: “It is forbidden to take or kill gray whales
or right whales, except when the meat and products of suchwhales are to be used exclusively for local consumption by
the aborigines.” This paragraph does not have any provision
concerning ship efficiency or catch method. In other words,
it means that catch can be carried out with more efficientmodern whaling boats or with whaling guns, or such catchneed not be necessarily carried out by the aborigines.

15

IWC/39/26“Aboriginal subsistence whaling means whaling for
purposes of local aboriginal consumption carriedout by or on behalf of aboriginal indigenous or
native peoples who share strong community,
familial, social and cultural ties related to acontinuing traditional dependence on whaling andon the use of whales.” This is a description difficult
to understand and is not clear because it does notoffer any practical definition of “Aboriginal people.
“Local aboriginal consumption means the
traditional uses of whale products by local
aboriginal, indigenous or native communities inmeeting their nutritional, subsistence and culturalrequirements. The term includes trade in items
which are by-products of subsistence catches.”“Subsistence catches are catches of whales byaboriginal subsistence whaling operations.” All theabove descriptions do not carry clear meaning.

with the word ‘aboriginal’ was negated, and was shifted
into a more efficient modern whaling method in order tominimize loss of whale meat in hunting. In Greenland,
hand-held harpoons and rifle guns are used to catch small
cetaceans, and boats with small engines are used at times.
In the case of minke whales, however, small fishing vessels
having a whaling gun loaded with non-explosive harpoons
are used when necessary. Several vessels with large
whaling guns are needed to catch fin whales. Thus whaling
methods have been made increasingly efficient, although
at a gradual pace. In the Soviet Bering Sea, whaling vessels
catch a total of 140 gray whales on behalf of the aborigines.
Whaling here is not ‘by aborigines’ although it is ‘foraborigines’.
It is also natural that food consumed by aborigines
approaches to that consumed by non-aborigines, although
its special and traditional characteristics are retained.
Regardless the definition of aborigine, it is desirable for
local residents to come to consume healthy and wellbalanced food. In this sense, the life of “aborigine” keeps
on approaching to that of ‘non-aborigines’. But that does
not mean that the ‘aborigines’ will not have a need forwhales. The relationship between whales and local
inhabitants should be stressed. As stated in the report of
the Panel Meeting of Experts on Aboriginal/Subsistence
Whaling, held in Seattle, U.S.A., in 1979, “the complexof whaling and associated activities is perhaps the mostimportant single element in the culture and society of north
Alaskan whale hunting communities. It provides a focus
for the ordering of social integration, political leadership,
ceremonial activity, traditional education, personality
values, and Eskimo identity”.
F.O. Kapel spoke of the Greenland whaling as follows
in IWC/35/ABl: “ ...subsistence hunting may be regarded
as hunting for household economy, with a distribution
system which secures that the community shares theproducts. Under this point of view, the present Greenlandic
hunting may be characterized as a mainly subsistence
hunting with a minor commercial element”.
The contents of ‘aboriginal whaling’ currently
authorized by the IWC are changing and, if demand
increases in the future, even greater changes should follow,
and their situation is foreseen to approach to that of coastal
whaling, making it increasingly difficult to draw a clear
distinction between ‘aboriginal whaling’ and regional
coastal whaling. Since the core of the issue surrounding‘aboriginal whaling’ is not preservation of primitive
whaling but maintenance of subsistence means and whale
meat supply in local communities, new approaches should
be discussed to deal with this type of whaling, including
small-type coastal whaling.

II. ABORIGINAL WHALING VERSUS
COASTAL WHALING
From the background given in the foregoing, it canbe understood that the substantial contents of ‘aboriginal
whaling’ have changed as time passed by. The concept ofaboriginal whaling is not fixed. Aborigines themselvesalso change. As in the case of Greenlanders, ‘aborigines’
mingle with outside people, and their population increases,
which results in a greater demand for whale meat. “Dueto the rapidly increasing population of Greenland, thepresent demand for edible whale products is also growing,
and the local market is far from satisfied.” (IWC/35/SB1)
It is noted that, because of high whale meat prices recently,
public institutions such as school dormitories and hospitals
are unable to obtain the amount of whale meat they wish
to have.
The U.S. government estimated the number of whales
needed for aboriginal whaling in North Alaska as follows(TC/36/AS8): The aborigine population increased in recent
years, and the number of active whaling crew members
increased to 100, which is more or less double the level inearly 1960s. In 1977-1983, the number stayed between
89 and 104. In the 24 years between 1969 and 1983, 69
crew members on the average caught a total of 439 whales— which is 18 whales per year and 0.26 whale per crew
member. The catch figure of 26 whales was obtained bymultiplying 0.26 whale per crew member with 100 (=present number of crew members), thus taking into accountthe increasing number of operators in line with thepopulation growth.
Furthermore, the primitive catch method associated16